4 research outputs found
Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies
Given the powerful implications of relationship quality for health and well-being, a central mission of relationship science is explaining why some romantic relationships thrive more than others. This large-scale project used machine learning (i.e., Random Forests) to 1) quantify the extent to which relationship quality is predictable and 2) identify which constructs reliably predict relationship quality. Across 43 dyadic longitudinal datasets from 29 laboratories, the top relationship-specific predictors of relationship quality were perceived-partner commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, perceived-partner satisfaction, and conflict. The top individual-difference predictors were life satisfaction, negative affect, depression, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety. Overall, relationship-specific variables predicted up to 45% of variance at baseline, and up to 18% of variance at the end of each study. Individual differences also performed well (21% and 12%, respectively). Actor-reported variables (i.e., own relationship-specific and individual-difference variables) predicted two to four times more variance than partner-reported variables (i.e., the partner’s ratings on those variables). Importantly, individual differences and partner reports had no predictive effects beyond actor-reported relationship-specific variables alone. These findings imply that the sum of all individual differences and partner experiences exert their influence on relationship quality via a person’s own relationship-specific experiences, and effects due to moderation by individual differences and moderation by partner-reports may be quite small. Finally, relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables. This collective effort should guide future models of relationships
Partners’ attachment insecurity predicts greater physiological threat in anticipation of attachment-relevant interactions
© The Author(s) 2017. This study examined whether anticipating interacting with a partner higher in attachment insecurity predicted greater physiological threat in an emotion regulation context. Eighty-eight couples watched an emotionally negative film clip, prepared to discuss the video with their partner, and then engaged in a conversation. One dyad member (regulator) was randomly assigned to express versus suppress affective displays while his/ her partner (target) was given no additional instructions. Greater partner avoidance was associated with stronger physiological responses consistent with the experience of threat—sympathetic arousal coupled with increased vascular resistance—when regulators anticipated suppressing versus expressing affective displays. Greater partner anxiety was associated with greater physiological threat responses regardless of the emotion regulation context. Threat responses also manifested during the conversation: Regulators and targets with highly avoidant partners exhibited greater threat responses when suppressing versus expressing affective displays. Additionally, more insecure partners found the conversation more difficult. These data are the first to show that anticipating attachment-relevant interactions with more insecure partners elicit cardiovascular responses diagnostic of threat
Do habitual emotional suppression measures predict response-focused situational suppression during social interactions?
Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies
Given the powerful implications of relationship quality for health and well-being, a central mission of relationship science is explaining why some romantic relationships thrive more than others. This large-scale project used machine learning (i.e., Random Forests) to 1) quantify the extent to which relationship quality is predictable and 2) identify which constructs reliably predict relationship quality. Across 43 dyadic longitudinal datasets from 29 laboratories, the top relationship-specific predictors of relationship quality were perceived-partner commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, perceived-partner satisfaction, and conflict. The top individual-difference predictors were life satisfaction, negative affect, depression, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety. Overall, relationship-specific variables predicted up to 45% of variance at baseline, and up to 18% of variance at the end of each study. Individual differences also performed well (21% and 12%, respectively). Actor-reported variables (i.e., own relationship-specific and individual-difference variables) predicted two to four times more variance than partner-reported variables (i.e., the partner's ratings on those variables). Importantly, individual differences and partner reports had no predictive effects beyond actor-reported relationship-specific variables alone. These findings imply that the sum of all individual differences and partner experiences exert their influence on relationship quality via a person's own relationship-specific experiences, and effects due to moderation by individual differences and moderation by partner-reports may be quite small. Finally, relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables. This collective effort should guide future models of relationships